The historical ecology approach in species conservation – Identifying suitable habitat management for the endangered clouded Apollo butterfly (<em>Parnassius mnemosyne</em> L.) in Sweden

Anna Westin; Tommy Lennartsson; Jan-Olov Björklund; Anna Westin; Tommy Lennartsson; Jan-Olov Björklund

doi:10.3934/environsci.2018.4.244

AIMS Environmental Science

2018, Volume 5, Issue 4: 244-272. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2018.4.244

Previous Article Next Article

Research article Topical Sections

The historical ecology approach in species conservation – Identifying suitable habitat management for the endangered clouded Apollo butterfly (Parnassius mnemosyne L.) in Sweden

1.
Swedish Biodiversity centre, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden
2.
Consultant butterfly expert, Västernäs 1, Herräng, Sweden

Received: 29 May 2018 Accepted: 13 July 2018 Published: 25 July 2018

A core task in biodiversity conservation is to protect and restore populations of endangered species. The analysis of causes of decline based on data sampled in declining populations in sub-optimal habitats risks overlooking necessary environmental factors because they are no longer present at the sites. It may therefore be necessary to search for conditions that were present before the species began to decline. We used an historical ecology approach to identify critical ecological needs for the endangered butterfly Clouded Apollo, Parnassius mnemosyne, in Sweden in relation to historical and current land use. The most suitable habitat structure and management was transformed into a plan for restoration and management, applied at two P. mnemosyne sites. The populations of P. mnemosyne and its host-plant, Corydalis solida, were monitored annually 2004–2014. Based on previous knowledge about P. mnemosyne, the Swedish plan for conservation of the species recommends regular clearings of shrubs and trees in order to maintain a mosaic tree-grassland habitat, and a limited of removal of ground biomass. Our analysis suggested an alternative management approach, late and rather intense grazing. The populations of P. mnemosyne and its host plant increased in response to this management regime and the butterfly started dispersing to new sites. We suggest a structured method for combining ecological and historical knowledge, which can reveal habitat conditions difficult to detect in the field today, but that are of crucial importance for successful species conservation.
- Parnassius mnemosyne,
- land-use history,
- historical ecology,
- grassland management,
- species conservation
Citation: Anna Westin, Tommy Lennartsson, Jan-Olov Björklund. The historical ecology approach in species conservation – Identifying suitable habitat management for the endangered clouded Apollo butterfly (Parnassius mnemosyne L.) in Sweden[J]. AIMS Environmental Science, 2018, 5(4): 244-272. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2018.4.244

Related Papers:

Abstract

A core task in biodiversity conservation is to protect and restore populations of endangered species. The analysis of causes of decline based on data sampled in declining populations in sub-optimal habitats risks overlooking necessary environmental factors because they are no longer present at the sites. It may therefore be necessary to search for conditions that were present before the species began to decline. We used an historical ecology approach to identify critical ecological needs for the endangered butterfly Clouded Apollo, Parnassius mnemosyne, in Sweden in relation to historical and current land use. The most suitable habitat structure and management was transformed into a plan for restoration and management, applied at two P. mnemosyne sites. The populations of P. mnemosyne and its host-plant, Corydalis solida, were monitored annually 2004–2014. Based on previous knowledge about P. mnemosyne, the Swedish plan for conservation of the species recommends regular clearings of shrubs and trees in order to maintain a mosaic tree-grassland habitat, and a limited of removal of ground biomass. Our analysis suggested an alternative management approach, late and rather intense grazing. The populations of P. mnemosyne and its host plant increased in response to this management regime and the butterfly started dispersing to new sites. We suggest a structured method for combining ecological and historical knowledge, which can reveal habitat conditions difficult to detect in the field today, but that are of crucial importance for successful species conservation.

References

[1]	Diamond JM (1984) "Normal" extinction of isolated populations. In: Nitecki, M.H. Extinctions. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 191–246.
[2]	Caughley G, Gunn A (1996) Conservation Biology in Theory and Practice. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Blackwell Science.
[3]	Foster D, Swanson F, Aber J, et al. (2003) The importance of land-use legacies to ecology and conservation. BioScience 53: 77–88. doi: 10.1641/0006-3568(2003)053[0077:TIOLUL]2.0.CO;2
[4]	Lunt ID, Spooner PG (2010) Using historical ecology to understand patterns of biodiversity in fragmented agricultural landscapes. J Biogeography 32: 1859–1873.
[5]	Lennartsson T, Westin A, Iuga A, et al. (2016) "The meadow is the mother of the field". Comparing transformations in hay production in three European Agroecosystems. Martor 21: 103–126.
[6]	Dahlström A, Cousins SAO, Eriksson O (2006) The history (1620–2003) of land use, people and livestock, and the relationship to present plant species diversity in a rural landscape in Sweden. Environ and Hist 12: 191–212. doi: 10.3197/096734006776680218
[7]	Gustavsson E, Lennartsson T, Emanuelsson M (2007) Land use more than 200 years ago explains current grassland plant diversity in a Swedish agricultural landscape. Biol Conserv 138: 47–59. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2007.04.004
[8]	Kana S, Kull T, Otsus M (2008) Change in agriculturally used land and related habitat loss: A case study in eastern Estonia over 50 years. Est J Ecol 57: 119–132. doi: 10.3176/eco.2008.2.04
[9]	Johansson LJ, Hall K, Prentice HC, et al. (2008) Semi-natural grassland continuity, long-term land-use change and plant species richness in an agricultural landscape on Öland, Sweden. Landscape Urban Plan 84: 200–211. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.08.001
[10]	Heubes J, Retzer V, Schmidtlein S, et al. (2011) Historical land use explains current distribution of calcareous grassland species. Folia Geobot 46: 1–16. doi: 10.1007/s12224-010-9090-5
[11]	Aggemyr E, Cousins SAO (2012) Landscape structure and land use history influence changes in island plan composition after 100 years. J Biogeogr 39: 1645–1656. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2699.2012.02733.x
[12]	Cousins SAO, Auffret AG, Lindgren J, et al. (2015) Regional-scale land-cover change during the 20th century and its consequences for biodiversity. Ambio 44: 17–27. doi: 10.1007/s13280-014-0585-9
[13]	Helm A, Hanski L, Pärtel M (2006) Slow response of plant species richness to habitat loss and fragmentation. Ecol Lett 9: 72–77.
[14]	Lindborg R, Eriksson O (2004) Historical landscape connectivity affects present plant species diversity. Ecology 85: 1840–1845. doi: 10.1890/04-0367
[15]	Herben T, Münzbergová Z, Mildén M, et al. (2006) Long-term spatial dynamics of Succisa pratensis in a changing rural landscape: Linking dynamical modelling with historical maps. J Ecol 94: 131–143. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2745.2005.01063.x
[16]	Lennartsson T, Oostermeijer JGB (2001) Demographic variation and population viability in Gentianella campestris: effects of grassland management and environmental stochasticity. J Ecol 89: 451–463. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2745.2001.00566.x
[17]	Dahlström A, Lennartsson T, Wissman J, et al. (2008) Biodiversity and traditional land use in south-central Sweden: The significance of management timing). Environ Hist 14: 385–403. doi: 10.3197/096734008X333572
[18]	Münzbergová Z, Cousins SAO, Herben T, et al. (2013) Historical habitat connectivity affects current genetic structure in a grassland species. Plant Biol 15: 195–202. doi: 10.1111/j.1438-8677.2012.00601.x
[19]	Verheyen K, Guntenspergen GR, Biesbrouck B, et al. (2003) An integrated analysis of the effects of past and use on forest herb colonization at the landscape scale. J EcoL 91: 731–742. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2745.2003.00807.x
[20]	Augenstein B, Ulrich W, Habel JC (2012) Directional temporal shifts in community structure of butterflies and ground beetles in fragmented oligotrophic grasslands of Central Europe. Basic Appl Ecol 13: 715–724. doi: 10.1016/j.baae.2012.09.004
[21]	Lennartsson T, Westin A, Crumley CL (2017) Historical Ecology in theory and practice: Editors' reflections. In: Crumley, C.L., Lennartsson, T., Westin, A., Issues and Concepts in Historical Ecology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 275–297.
[22]	Plieninger T, Höchtl F, Spek T (2006) Traditional land-use and nature conservation in European rural landscapes. Environ Sci Policy 9: 317–321. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2006.03.001
[23]	Gustavsson E, Dahlström A, Emanuelsson M, et al. (2011) Combining historical and ecological knowledge to optimise biodiversity conservation in semi-natural grasslands. In: Lopez-Pujol, J. The importance of biological interactions in the study of biodiversity, Rijeka: InTech publishers, 173–196.
[24]	van Swaay C, Wynhoff I, Verovnik R, et al. (2010)Parnassius mnemosyne. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2015.2, 2010. Available from: www.iucnredlist.org.
[25]	Franzén M, Imby L (2008) Åtgärdsprogram för Mnemosynefjäril, Parnassius mnemosyne. Naturvårdsverket rapport 5829, Stockholm.
[26]	Jonasson D (2014) Utvärdering av åtgärdsprogrammet för mnemosynefjäril, 2008–2012. Linköpings universitet.
[27]	Westling A, Gärdenfors U, Tranvik L (2015) Rödlistade arter i Sverige 2015. Uppsala: Artdatabanken.
[28]	Action program for threatened species and habitats, 2018. Available from: http://www.naturvardsverket.se/Miljoarbete-i-samhallet/Miljoarbete-i-Sverige/Uppdelat-efter-omrade/Naturvard/Atgardsprogram-for-hotade-arter/.
[29]	Hedin E, Björklund JO (2008) Mnemosynefjärilen i Uppland, historik och nuvarande utbredning. Stockholm and Uppsala Regional administration boards.
[30]	Eriksson O, Bolmgren K, Westin A, et al. (2015) Historic hay cutting dates from Sweden 1873–1951 and their implications for conservation management of species-rich meadows. Biol Conserv 184: 100–107. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2015.01.012
[31]	Hodgson J (1979) Nomenclature and definitions in grazing studies. Grass Forage Sci 34: 11–18. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2494.1979.tb01442.x
[32]	Dahlström A (2006) Betesmarker, djurantal och betestryck 1620–1850. Naturvårdsaspekter på historisk beteshävd i Syd- och Mellansverige. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae Sueciae 2006:95. Uppsala. SLU.
[33]	Warren MS, Thomas CD, Thomas JA (1984) The status of the heath fritillary butterfly Mellicta athalia Rott. in Britain. Biol Conserv 29: 287–305. doi: 10.1016/0006-3207(84)90001-6
[34]	Aagaard K, Hindar K, Hanssen O, et al. (1997) Bestandsstruktur og genetisk mangfold i norske bestander av Parnassius mnemosyne og Parnassius apollo (Lepidoptera). NINA Oppdragsmelding 462: 1–20.
[35]	Aagaard SMD, Ødegaard F, Hanssen O, et al. (2011) Faglig grunnlag for handlingsplan for mnemosynesommerfugl Parnassius mnemosyne. NINA Rapport 678.
[36]	Benes J, Cizek O, Dovala J, et al. (2006) Intensive game keeping, coppicing and butterflies: The story of Milkovicky woods, Czech Republic. Forest Ecol Manag 237: 353–365. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2006.09.058
[37]	Bergström A (2005) Oviposition site preferences of the threatened butterfly Parnassius mnemosyne-implications for conservation. J Insect Conserv 9: 21–27. doi: 10.1007/s10841-004-3204-4
[38]	Bolotov IN, Gofarov MY, Rykov AM, et al. (2013) Northern boundary of the range of the Clouded Apollo butterfly Parnassius mnemosyne (L.) (Papilionidae): Climate influence or degradation of larval host plants? Nota Lepidopterologica 36: 19–33.
[39]	Brattström A, Betzholtz PE, Bjerding F, et al. (2007) Har mnemosynefjärilen Parnassius mnemosyne (Lepidoptera: Papilionidae) en framtid i Blekinge? Entomologisk Tidskrift 128: 81–88.
[40]	Ehlers BK, Olesen JM (2004) Flower production in relation to individual plant age and leaf production among different patches of Corydalis intermedia. Plant Ecol 174: 71–78. doi: 10.1023/B:VEGE.0000046060.77491.b9
[41]	Heikkinen RK, Luoto M, Kuussari M, et al. (2005) New insights into butterfly-environment relationships using partitioning methods. Proc R Soc B 272: 2203–2210. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2005.3212
[42]	Konvička M, Kuras T (1999) Population structure, behaviour and selection of oviposition sites of an endangered butterfly, Parnassius mnemosyne, in Litovelské Pomoravi, Czech Republic. J Insect Conserv 3: 211–223. doi: 10.1023/A:1009641618795
[43]	Konvička M, Duchoslav M, Haraštová M, et al. (2001) Habitat utilization and behaviour of adult Parnassius mnemosyne (Lepidoptera: Papilionidae) in the Litovelske Pmnoravi, Czech Republic. Nota lepidopterologica 24: 39–51.
[44]	Konvička M, Vlasanek P, Hauck D (2006) Absence of forest mantles creates ecological traps for Parnassius mnemosyne (Papilionidae). Nota Lepidopterologica 29: 145–152.
[45]	Kuras T, Beneš J, Čelechovský A, et al. (2000) Parnassius Mnemosyne. (Lepidoptera: Papilionidae) in North Moravia: Review of present and past distribution, proposal for conservation. Klapakiana 36: 93–112.
[46]	Kuusemets V, Meier K, Luig J, et al. (2005) Habitat and landscape structure requirements of Clouded Apollo (Parnassius mnemosyne). Studies on the Ecology and Conservation of Butterflies in Europe 1: 18.
[47]	Liivamägi A, Kuusemets V, Luig J, et al. (2013) Changes in the distriution of Clouded Apollo Parnassius mnemosyne (Lepidoptera: Papilionidae) in Estonia. Entomo Fennica 24: 186–192.
[48]	Luoto M, Kuussaari M, Rita H, et al. (2010) Determinants of distribution and abundance in the Clouded Apollo butterfly: A landscape ecological approach. Ecography 24: 601–617.
[49]	Meglécz E, Nève G, Pecsenye K, et al. (1999) Genetic variations in space and time in Parnassius mnemosyne (L.) (Lepidoptera) populations in north-east Hungary: Implications for conservation. Biol Conserv 89: 251–259.
[50]	Meier K, Kuusemets V, Luig J, et al. (2005) Riparian buffer zones as elements of ecological networks: Case study on Parnassius mnemosyne distribution in Estonia. Eco Eng 24: 531–537. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2005.01.017
[51]	Välimäki P, Itämies J (2003) Migration of the Clouded Apollo butterfly Parnassius mnemosyne in a network of suitable habitats-effects of patch characteristics. Ecography 26: 679–691. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0587.2003.03551.x
[52]	Välimäki P, Itämies J (2005) Effects of canopy coverage on the immature stages of the Clouded Apollo butterfly [Parnassius mnemosyne (L.)] with observations on larval behaviour. Entomol Fennica 16: 117–123.
[53]	Franzén M, Johannesson M (2005) Intressanta fynd av storfjärilar (Macrolepidoptera) i Sverige 2004. Ent Tidskr 126: 55–70.
[54]	Lindeborg M (2006) Intressanta fynd av storfjärilar (Macrolepidoptera) i Sverige 2005. Entomologisk tidskrift 127: 61–71.
[55]	Pihlgren A, Lennartsson T (2008) Shrub effects on herbs and grasses in semi-natural grasslands: positive, negative or neutral relationships? Grass Forage Sci 63: 9–21. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2494.2007.00610.x
[56]	Thomas JA, Bourn NA, Clarke RT, et al. (2001) The quality and isolation of habitat patches both determine where butterflies persist in fragmented landscapes. Proc Bio Sci 268: 1791–1796. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2001.1693
[57]	Pöyry J, Lindgren S, Salminen J, et al. (2005) Responses of butterfly and moth species to restored cattle grazing in semi-natural grasslands. Biol Conserv 122: 465–478. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2004.09.007
[58]	Öckinger E, Eriksson AK, Smith HG (2006) Effects of grassland abandonment, restoration and management on butterflies and vascular plants. Biol conserv 133: 291–300. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2006.06.009
[59]	Öckinger E, Smith HG (2006) Landscape composition and habitat area affects butterfly species richness in semi-natural grasslands. Oecologia 149: 526–534. doi: 10.1007/s00442-006-0464-6
[60]	Kuussaari M, Heikkinen RK, Heliola J, et al. (2015) Successful translocation of the threatened Clouded Apollo butterfly (Parnassius mnemosyne) and metapopulation establishment in southern Finland. Biol Conserv 190: 51–59. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2015.05.011
[61]	Pettersson LB, Mellbrand K, Ottvall R (2013) Svensk Dagfjärilsövervakning 2012. Lund: University of Lund.
[62]	Hammett JE (1992) The shapes of adaptation: Historical ecology of anthropogenic landscapes in the southeastern United States. Landscape Ecol 7: 121–135. doi: 10.1007/BF02418943
[63]	Solon J (1995) Anthropogenic disturbance and vegetation diversity in agricultural landscapes. Landscape Urban Plan 31: 171–180. doi: 10.1016/0169-2046(94)01043-8
[64]	Gragson T (1998) Potential versus actual vegetation: Human behaviour in a landscape medium. In: Balee, W. Advances in historical ecology, New York: Columbia University Press, 213–231.
[65]	Ross KA, Fox BJ, Fox MD (2002) Changes to plant species richness in forest fragments: fragment age, disturbance and fire history may be as important as area. J Bio geogr 29: 749–765.
[66]	Ihse M (1995) Swedish agricultural landscapes: patterns and changes during the last 50 years, studied by aerial photos. Landscape Urban Plan 31: 21–37. doi: 10.1016/0169-2046(94)01033-5
[67]	Lunt ID (1998) Two hundred years of land use and vegetation change in a remnant coastal woodland in southern Australia. Aust J Bot 46: 629–647. doi: 10.1071/BT97052
[68]	Egan D, Howell EA (2001) The historical ecology handbook: A restorationist's guide to reference ecosystems. Washington: Island Press. 1^st edition.
[69]	Spooner PG, Lunt ID, Robinson W (2002) Is fencing enough? The short-term effects of stock exclusion in remnant grassy woodlands in southern NSW. Ecol Manag Restor 3: 117–126.
[70]	Spooner PG, Lunt ID (2004) The influence of land-use history on roadside conservation values in an Australian agricultural landscape. Aust J Bot 52: 445–458. doi: 10.1071/BT04008
[71]	Eriksson O (2013) Species pools in cultural landscapes – niche construction, ecological opportunity and niche shifts. Ecography 36: 403–413. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0587.2012.07913.x
[72]	van Swaay C, Collins S, Dušej G, et al. (2012) Dos and don'ts for butterflies of the habitats directive of the European Union. J Nat Conserv 1: 73–153. doi: 10.3897/natureconservation.1.2786
[73]	Lennartsson T, Stighäll K (2005) Landmiljöer i kust och skärgård. Stockholm: Swedish Environment Protection Agency.
[74]	Caughley G (1994) Directions in conservation biology. J Anim Ecol 63: 215–244. doi: 10.2307/5542
[75]	Melbourne BA, Hastings A (2008) Extinction risk depends strongly on factors contributing to stochasticity. Nature 454: 100–103. doi: 10.1038/nature06922
[76]	Münzbergová Z (2006) Effect of population size on the prospect of species survival. Folia Geobot 41: 137–150. doi: 10.1007/BF02806475
[77]	Hanski I (1998) Metapopulation dynamics. Nature 396: 41–49. doi: 10.1038/23876
[78]	Habel JC, Engler JO, Rodder D, et al. (2012) Contrasting genetic and morphologic responses on recent population decline in two burnet moths (Lepidoptera, Zygaenidae). Conserv Genet 13: 1293–1304. doi: 10.1007/s10592-012-0372-8
[79]	Oostermeijer JGB (2003) Treats to rare plant persistence. In: Bringham, C.A., Schwartz, M.W., Population viability in plants. Ecological Studies. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer, 165: 17–58.
[80]	Lennartsson T, Svensson R (1996) Patterns in the decline of three species of Gentianella in Sweden illustrating the deterioration of semi-natural grasslands. Symb Bot Ups 31: 169–184.
[81]	Swedish Government, Fourth national report on the convention on biological diversity, Sweden. 2009. Available from: https://www.cbd.int/doc/world/se/se-nr-04-en.pdf.
[82]	Lennartsson T (2010) En analys av åtgärdsprogram för hotade arter i jordbrukslandskapet - Arter som vägvisare för skötsel, Stockholm: Swedish Environment Protection Agency.
[83]	Dahlström A, Iuga AM, Lennartsson T (2013) Managing biodiversity rich hay-meadows in the EU: A comparison of Swedish and Romanian grasslands. Environ Conserv 40: 194–205. doi: 10.1017/S0376892912000458
[84]	Agnoletti M (2008) The introduction of historical and cultural values in the sustainable management of European forests. Global Environ 1: 172–199. doi: 10.3197/ge.2008.010207
[85]	Rotherham ID (2015) Bio-cultural heritage and biodiversity: Emerging paradigms in conservation and planning. Biodivers Conserv 24: 3405–3429. doi: 10.1007/s10531-015-1006-5
[86]	Ibbe M, Milberg P, Tunér A, et al. (2011) History matters: Impact of historical land use on butterfly diversity in clear-cuts in a boreal landscape. Forest Ecol Manag 261: 1885–1891. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2011.02.011
[87]	Johansson V, Knape J, Franzén M (2017) Population dynamics and future persistence of the clouded Apollo butterfly in southern Scandinavia: The importance of low intensity grazing and creation of habitat patches. Biol Conserv 206: 120–131. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2016.12.029
[88]	Gorbach VV, Kabanen DN (2010) Spatial Organization of the Clouded Apollo Population (Parnassius mnemosyne) in Onega Lake Basin. Entomol Rev 90: 11–22. doi: 10.1134/S0013873810010021
[89]	Thomas JA (1991) Rare species conservation: case studies of European butterflies. In: Spellerberg, I.F., Goldsmith, F.B., Morris, M.G. The Scientific Management of Temperate Communities for Conservation: The 31st Symposium of the British Ecological Society, Southampton, 1989. Cambridge: Blackwell Science, 149–197.
[90]	Oates MR (1995) Butterfly conservation within the management of grassland habitats. In: Pullin, A.S., Ecology and Conservation of Butterflies. Dordrecht: Springer, 98–112.
[91]	Ehrlén J (2003) Fitness components versus total demographic effects: Evaluating herbivore impacts on a perennial herb. Am Nat 162: 796–810. doi: 10.1086/379350

Reader Comments

your name:*

Email:*
© 2018 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)